Christian Breukelman

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order requiring the respondent unit owner and tenant to permanently remove a dog from the unit, alleging a breach of the corporation's pet prohibition rules.

The tenant claimed the dog was an emotional support animal but provided falsified medical notes.

The respondents failed to participate in the hearing.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found the respondents in breach of the pet provisions and ordered the permanent removal of the dog within 30 days.

The tribunal also awarded $4,200 in costs to the applicant on a joint and several basis.

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order to remove the respondent tenant's emotional support animal, a large dog, alleging the dog posed a safety risk due to lunging and barking incidents.

The Tribunal found that the incidents were minor, the dog was not aggressive, and the applicant failed to establish undue hardship.

The Tribunal also refused to enforce conditions unilaterally imposed by the applicant, finding the applicant breached its procedural duty to accommodate by failing to engage in good faith discussions with the respondent.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay 60% of the respondent's legal costs.

The applicant filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal.

During the online hearing process, the applicant repeatedly failed to respond to requests from the Tribunal member and staff.

After issuing a Notice of Intent to Dismiss to which neither party responded, the Tribunal found the case had been abandoned and ordered it dismissed.